socialist takeover of the USA

The issue of a socialist takeover of the USA is on one hand upsetting, but on the other it might very well be a cause for people to take up arms and defend American values? I mean, until now there no one has stepped on the brakes of a socialist revolution. Maybe now people might begin to see the ugly face of socialism?


Also I am wondering about the fact that Allan Bloom suggested that universities are the centre of the issues. So what I suggest is to learn the Federalist Papers, John Locke, and Daniel Defoe's  political writings of the 1700's.

But since it might be a bit late for this, the best idea would be for Republicans to protect their homes and business's at all cost. Not to give in an inch.

"There is something about philosophy that deprives people of common sense."

There is some aspect of Philosophy that is odd as Sandra Lehman [a student of philosophy from Germany] once told me: "There is something about philosophy that deprives people of common sense."[However, I doubt if she would include Thomas Reid-the philosopher of common sense

That in fact goes along with Rav Nahman of Breslov who also has a particular warning even about "hashkafa" books even written by the great sages of Israel.
There might be something to this. He in particular was not very thrilled with the Guide for the Perplexed.

Steven Weinberg [once of the discovers of the connection between the weak force and electro-magnetism] had a really insightful comment about philosophy. He said it like nation states before the advent of the post office. The main purpose of nation states was simply to save one from other nation states. Same with philosophy, it only purpose is to save one from other philosophies.

Rav Nahman [of Uman and Breslov] emphasized saying the words and going on.  But his approach was towards the Oral and Written Law. In fact he gave  a list of what one ought to finish every years in such a fashion, the two Talmuds, Rif, Rosh, all the Midrashim etc.
But based on some Rishonim [medieval authorities] I expand that to include Physics and Mathematics.[Not all Rishonim agree].
Now one one hand R. Natan the disciple of Rav Nahman held one ought not to learn these subjects at all. To him they were all in the category of "outside wisdoms". In Sanhedrin   there is a list of things for which one loses his or her portion in the next world. One of them is he who reads "outside books".

The way I usually deal with this was to apply what Rav Nahman had said about doctors to the issue. Rav Nahman strongly turned people to avoid doctors. However when a true vaccine came out in those days he said one must take it. So avoiding doctors did not refer to true medicine. In those days oxygen had not even been discovered. Doctors were still going with the four humors of the ancient Greeks and blood letting.[ the four humors—blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm].

So my feeling about this is his objection against outside wisdoms was pseudo man made wisdoms. Not true Physics in which the Glory of God is revealed.

In the laws concerning a "Herem" excommunication there a very relevant point that one who ignore the excommunication is also comes automatically under the terms of the excommunication.

This would show why the religious world is so corrupt. Because they universally ignore the signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication.

That unfortunately includes the Litvak yeshivas.

[What I mean here is that Herem is different from Nidui. In Nidui one can learn Torah and teach. But in Herem no one can learn nor from the one under herem and nor can he learn himself. One of the major halacha books of the litvak yeshiva world brings constantly sources that were under the herem so that sort of excludes the entire Litvak world
Sp the proper approach is to start to be alert to the fact that one must have nothing to do with the Sitra Achra. [Dark Side.]

However I must add that the actual language of the herem was not on the Baal Shem Tov himself nor most of his disciples. So Rav Nahman would clearly be in the clear, See the actual language and you will see what  mean.

So yeshivas might learn Halacha in the morning, and that makes sense; but the not the way they are doing it. Rather the Shulchan Aruch with the Beer Hetaiv or the Tur with the Beit Yoseph.

In short, the Gra must be taken seriously. The facy of his being ignored is what has caused the most of religious world to be absorbed into the Sitra Achra Dark Side, as anyone who has tasted of it can already testify without my help.
And there is an added degree of responsibility of the Litvak yeshivas because all Israel looks to them to set the standard of what is really kosher and what is not. Even of many people do not follow this their example strictly still they look towards the Litvak would to tell the rest of us what really is ok and what is not. So when they ignore the Gra about this most essential issue they are really messing up.

The next world war I can imagine could start between India and China, and only from there spread to everyone else. [or Japan and Taiwan].

I have thought about what would be a benefit for the many {זיכוי הרבים} and it occurred to me today that building yeshivas on the name of the Gra would be the best idea. However for me personally that does not seem like a possibility. So instead perhaps I could recommend to others that do in fact have the ability to do so.

But to be more specific let me just say that the name of the Gra would be great because that name implies a certain way of learning Torah and a certain path which is pure authentic Torah. So even if someone like myself or others do not merit to walk in the straight and narrow path of true Torah at least the message would be clear.

And perhaps even the great Litvak yeshivas this would be a good idea i.e. to be more careful about the path of the Gra since that is (after all) exactly what they were founded on (but without the name).

[But I do have to add that  learning the "seven wisdoms" was definitely a part of the path of the Gra but this for some reason is not well known. ]

President Trump: Do not give in on any issue. Support the police. The coming election makes no difference. Do what is right now. Support the police and do not give in an inch.

But to call slavery wrong would be saying that the Old Testament is evil.

There is nothing wrong with slavery. The main issue is how you treat a slave. [It is after all better that freeing them and then having them destroy Western Civilization.] In its essence however there is nothing wrong with it. And not only that but the fact that many people accept the idea that slavery is wrong. So they have already given up on the Bible.
So making war on the South was a mistake that has come back to haunt us.
\
[It occurred to me that Rav Nahman hinted to this situation in his 13 stories.--about the country that life had lost its flavour. The food had its its taste. The smells did not smell right. Everything was empty. In that story it turned out the cause was imported slaves. The advice that worked to save that country was to deport them. It does not seem clear how that might work today.]

Some Christians claim that Slavery is wrong. So the the Bible when you have slavery according to them  is evil? (This is not to mention the letter of Peter [first letter second chapter] which says slaves should obey their masters.) Clearly Catholic doctrine is that the commandments of God are good, not evil. [Of course I am referring to the institution in the Bible of slavery of both Israelis and gentiles but also I am thinking of Jesus who held everything in God's Law is good and will never pass away. Paul also stated the Law of God is good but he held that after Jesus came people no longer have to keep some aspects of it. Aquinas goes into that in detail. [That is where the Natural Law aspect of Torah gets into Aquinas. That eventually became natural rights with John Locke.]]
Besides that I have never heard that Protestant doctrine holds that the commandments of God are evil. Rather that they hold after Jesus some are not obligated. But to call them wrong would be saying that the Old Testament is evil.

My basic impression is that when it comes to political theory, nothing is anywhere near the amazing Federalist Papers by Madison, Hamilton and John Jay. And that system of government would still work fine today if not for the race issue.The Achilles Heel of the USA. So what do do now? Well I see the world getting divided into two parts. One part is Mad Max and Seattle chaos. The other is a small remnant of where Western Civilization will continue to grow and proper like Space X.
Clearly the seeds of the destruction of the USA were sown by communist infiltration of the Western universities.  [Now from Communist China.]

And furthermore I think that the best idea for Trump would be not to give in on any issue. No compromise.

Kant Friesian School

Besides Dr Kelley Ross there is also Robert Hanna who has a lot of respect for Leonard Nelson [that is the Kant Friesian School]. It is interesting that Springer Verlag  publishing has in fact published one of Nelson's books. [philosophical fallacies]

[Though as usual R Hanna did notice a some difference between Nelson's personal philosophy [Kant Fries] and the philosophical method that he was advocating. [In his book about philosophical fallacies].

This still does not help much when it comes to figuring how Hegel fits in to all this?
The trouble is the are just too many completely opposite interpretations of Hegel.
Cunningham versus McTaggart. But with Kant that is also a problem.
At least one thing we can all agree to is to throw out all twentieth century philosophy as being long overdue for the trash bin.


I did notice that some of the complaints about Hegel have to do with complaints about Communism that seeks for support from him. Another source of complaint comes from complaints about Germany in WWI. I have no idea what to think about that. Walter Kaufman saw Hegel more almost as a good American patriot. I would have to draw a blank about all this. To me it seemed clear that Hegel just wanted a middle path between freedom and law and order. That is freedom without the craziness of the French Revolution. And he did support the Prussian Monarchy--which was the source of reforms and constitutional laws as opposed to the previous sources of law in Prussia which was mainly the whim of princes. So there are some areas where Hegel was right. Other areas where Kant and Leonard Nelson were right. So in some way there ought to be some kind of way of finding a middle path.]

My basic impression is that when it comes to political theory, nothing is anywhere near the amazing Federalist Papers by Madison, Hamilton and John Jay. And that system of government would still work fine today if not for the race issue.The Achilles Heel of the USA. So what do do now? Well I see the world getting divided into two parts. One part is Mad Max and Seattle chaos. The other is a small remnant of where Western Civilization will continue to grow and proper like Space X.
Clearly the seeds of the destruction of the USA were sown by communist infiltration of the Western universities.  [Now from Communist China.]

One great thing about Rav Israel Salanter was to see how "midot" good character is the essence of Torah. This can easily be missed. But further than that he provided a way to gain good character.
In my own development I got the first part, but not the second.
That is,-- I saw how "midot tovot" [good character traits] is an essential part of Torah, and also got an idea of how to define good character. But the second part of working on one's own character by means of learning Musar -- I missed that part. And I think it almost does not even thought by many to be very effective. Still you have to wonder if this is possible resurrect. That is to learn Musar more than the fifteen minutes that is done in Litvak Yeshivas. But to get back to the original idea of learning lots of Musar--with the intention of improving one's character.

[Musar is based on the original Musar books of the Middle Ages. Then there were plenty more later like that Maharal from Prague. Then the books authored by the disciples of Rav Israel Salanter.]

w97 G Minor  [w97 in midi]

w98 in mp3 format  [w98 in midi]

So the fact that the religious world is now idolatry, it makes more sense to pray at home or in a Reform Temple [or Conservative.]

I noticed in the Old Testament that the major complaint is always idolatry. Rarely is any other commandment mentioned.  Go and check yourself. When there is a complaint about the kings of Israel or Yehudah and Benyamin it is always about idolatry and almost never is anything else even mentioned.
Even with King Solomon the complaint is not the women, but idolatry. The problem in fact with the women is that they turned his heart from God to serve idols. You see this clearly when God comes to him a third time to tell him that because he turned to other gods therefore his kingdom with be torn from him [all except one tribe] (Benyamin was no included in that promise even though they later in fact sided with the tribe of Yehuda) the complaint stated there is that he worshiped other gods. Not the foreign women.
So the fact that the religious world is now idolatry, it makes more sense to pray at home or in a Reform Temple [or Conservative.] [Nowadays there really is nowhere safe. Even the great Litvak yeshivas which one supposes go by the Gra have also been infiltrated by the Dark Side.]

[That is because the Dark Side is always trying to infiltrate into the would of holiness. So this is no surprise. But after the fact, it still means that to learn Torah one has to do so alone and avoid the religious world.]

Here is the longer Bezmenov Video

Bezmenov [What is going on in the USA.] This is the short Bezmenov Video

I have to add here that like he says here that a lot of the demoralization only started from the KGB but once the ball got going, it simply is done by Americans to Americans.


No one knows if he engineered his fictitious death in order to get the KGB off his tail, or if they actually got to him. I knew the KGB agent who discovered his whereabouts in Canada by monitoring the broadcasts from the West. But if they actually ever got to him I have no idea. [Needless to say the KGB lost no love on defectors.]

The religious world is mainly idolatry even though there are some areas that are true to Torah. The areas of true authentic Torah would be the Lithuanian yeshivas.

The religious world is mainly idolatry even though there are some areas that are true to Torah. The areas of true authentic Torah would be the Lithuanian yeshivas that are based on the Gra.
That is the three great NY yeshivas Mir, Chaim Berlin, Torah VeDaat. In Israel that means Ponovitch and Brisk.

However this is not meant to exclude Rav Nahman of Breslov. The reason is simple even though I would rather not go into it here. There was a book that collected all the letters of excommunication pus the testimonies in Villna that I went through and that led to my conclusion that Rav Nahman should be thought of as outside the excommunication and in fact a great tzadik. But to see the subject in detail, you have to see the actual language of the letter of excommunication that the Gra signed.

But the issue is more severe than simple idolatry. This is even though in Torah the most severe thing is idolatry. Still there is an aspect that is adds confusion to what is already a mess. The problem is label. Lets say you would take an idol of Krishna or some other Hindu idol and put a stamp of approval on that. Would that make it OK? Well clearly not. But in the religious world that is exactly what has happened. The label does not make it so.
So it would have been better in the first place to accept the approach of the Gra and Rav Shach before it had to be shown the hard way.

We see a lot of idolatry in the religious world. Thus Gra signed the letter of excommunication. But the result is that anything dedicated to idolatry is forbidden.

The prohibition of idolatry is a bit subtle. On one hand like my learning partner David Bronson explained to me that one can not be  guilty of the death penalty unless he worships a physical object.
But even not of the side of legal guilt, clearly there is guilt if one worships in the abstract.
You can see this in the Rambam in the 13 principles of faith [and also in Mishne Torah] that idolatry is worship of anything in heaven or earth, any of the four elements, any angels etc. That is anything other that the First Cause.

But what is worship exactly? Well there are the regular four services [sacrifice, bowing, burning pouring] that one is guilty, but then there is included the specific type of worship that is done for that idolatry even if it is not one of the four services.
And Rav Shach explains the basic essence of idolatry is the fact that someone believes that idol can save. That is how he explains the argument between R Yochanan and Reish Lakish about an idol that fell apart by itself. So people would say, "If it can not help itself, how can it help me?"

We see a lot of idolatry in the religious world. And there is in particular a commandment to get rid of it whether in Israel or outside of Israel. [Outside of Israel one is still required to get rid of idolatry but not required to pursue it.] Clearly this was the reason the Gra signed the letter of excommunication, and it seems to me to be a good idea to take that letter seriously,--even to the degree of considering it valid according to the letter of the law.

Plus there is a further result: Idolatry is not just forbidden to do, but any objects that are set aside for use of idolatry are also forbidden.

w96 G Minor   w96 midi   w96 nwc

The Kennedy approach to communism was to not let it come anywhere near the USA. He was willing to risk nuclear war to keep the Soviets away as the Cuban missile crisis showed. 


The same approach today would make sense. Keep Communism out of the USA. But how when already it saturates all schools and universities? There is not a front to fight at since it is everywhere.

[Allan Bloom already pointed out the problem years ago in his Closing of the American Mind. His said openly that the Social Studies and Humanities departments of universities are the problem. The implication is to get them on track or close them.]

Elon Musk is planning on settling on Mars.  The way to do that is to have a moon base that can serve as a launch site. It is easier to go to Mars and bring supplies from the moon than from Earth. My feeling about this is I would rather not have mankind confined to the Solar System. So my idea of how to get to space at this point is simply to study String Theory and General Relativity to see how a worm hole might be constructed.
The stars are there. There must be some way how to get there.

Now on one hand space is hard to bend. You need lots of gravity to do so. But there is something odd about electricity that does effect space. Like the Aaronov-Bohm Effect that changes the mathematical structure of space easily. So it does not bend, but it changes its basic structure. So there must be ways of changing spacetime that does not require gravity.

w95  w95 midi

 w95 nwc

Balance of Values.

One needs a balance of values.

From my parents home I learned the importance of self sufficiency and that was said and emphasized quite openly. But there were other unspoken lessons like Menschlichkeit, [to be a decent human being with good character], common sense, balance, family values, and by example my dad was an inventor of things for the USA part time and other times he went into business for himself. He made the Infra Red telescope in space that is not being used by NASA. (See Life magazine in 1954 July pages 24-26 showing that my dad was the inventor of the Infra Red Telescope--i.e.  Philip Rosenbloom) [The James Webb Space Telescope is an orbiting infrared observatory] Also Laser communication between satellites that is now being used by Space X.
So besides his example, there was a definite kind of appreciation for Math and Physics. [So this emphasis I saw in two places. First my parents home. Later I saw this in the Guide and Mishne Torah of the Rambam.


Later I went to Shar Yashuv in NY and learned also some important lessons. Learning Torah, gratitude, to avoid bitul Torah [i.e. the sin of not learning Torah when one has the opportunity to do so,], and also the emphasis on deep "iyun" [learning in depth] of Tosphot and not just to quickly skip to "Lumdut". [learning  in depth along the lines of Rav Haim of Brisk]This kind of learning I never saw afterwards until I met David Bronson in Uman.

In the Mir in NY,   is where I did in fact begin to appreciate the importance of "Lumdut" [Lumdut means learning in depth in a certain way--in a global fashion as you can see in Rav Haim of Brish or Rav Shach's Avi Ezri] also, plus Musar and Rav Israel Salanter, and great caution in laws that deal with monetary issues. [That is not to touch that which does not belong to you.] Plus there was a great emphasis on not speaking lashon hara [slander.]

In Israel I began to see in fact the importance of the Math and Physics thing again. Plus seeing the importance of the state of Israel,  and the land of Israel.

So all together I learned a lot of very important lessons. But how to combine them and fulfill them is not so simple. Still I am grateful for the great lessons I have learned and still hope to fulfill.

[I forgot to add that I learned some great lessons from the books of Rav Nahman of Breslov and Uman, Speaking with God as I would speak with  a friend. That is kind of like prayer in some ways but different in that one connects with God directly by speaking from the deepest truth that is in one's heart. Also the path of learning fast, not just fast but very fast--saying the words and going on.]

[Socrates at first held that virtue and knowledge are different and his opponent said it can be learned. Then through debate they changed their positions. Socrates held that Knowledge and virtue are one and in that context that meant it can be learned.]

So there is little doubt about what the good and true values one ought to stick with, The only question is the proper balance-how much to emphasize each one and which have priority and how to apply\ them in any given situation

A disciple of the Gra wrote a translation of Euclid into Hebrew. In the introduction he quotes the Gra ''When one lacks knowledge of the seven wisdom one will lack understanding Torah 100 times more." לפי החסרון בשבעת החכמות כן יחסר לאדם בידיעת התורה מאה פעמים יותר.

The Rambam that held learning Physics and Metaphysics are higher than Talmud.
That is from the Guide in the parable of the king in his country. The "Talmudiim" are outside the palace of the king. The physicists and philosophers are inside the palace. The Rambam could not have been clearer if had even tried.

[But I have to add here that I do not hold from watered down versions of things. (Popular introductions). Either learn the real thing, or do not learn it at all. While popular introductions can be useful to a small degree, but not as the main area of effort].

[You do not need to understand every word. Say the words and go on. See the Conversations of Rav Nahman 76 where this is explained in detail. But it is brought in the Gemara itself. And you do not need talent. You can discover more and great things even without talent. Wernher von Braun (the builder of the Saturn V that got man to the moon) failed at both Mathematics and Physics. Not did poorly. He failed. So you see you can excel.]

   

I noticed that someone is saying that the whole Covid thing is in order to get people to agree to accept the vaccine which will have a gene sequence that will affect and sabotage one's own DNA..

My feeling is this is probable. Covid is a hoax

I noticed a few years ago that the author of the Mishna [Yehuda the Prince] that he never said, "No".
[That I saw in the Yerushalmi, but I forgot the place.]

How nice it would be to have a wormhole which does not drag you into the center and connects to a different universe and does not even pull you towards the sides but gives you a nice easy trip to another universe or galaxy. Would that not be really convenient?

I just saw yesterday an interesting article. https://inspirehep.net/conferences/968592 Or the PDF is here: https://s3.cern.ch/inspire-prod-files-e/ef8e5a89fc3d6bda1793928980f70abd It is authored by someone in Russia and part of a conference on the name of Alexander Friedman about Gravity. A non flat metric leads to a different kind of wormhole. Could this be a hint for the far distant future about how to transverse a wormhole?

This is his conclusion: "Now, we can see that our solution contains a traversible wormhole [5] at r = -r0 connecting two infinite space - times r > -r0 and r < -r0 • It consist of two asymptotically Lobachevskyan spaces. The scalar curvature takes different asymptotical values on these sheets. Moreover, while on the sheet with the biggest curvature we have attraction by the central source, but on the sheet with the lower curvature we have repulsion! Concluding, this solution seems to be interesting since it is spherically symmetric and free from singularity."

How nice it would be to have a wormhole which does not drag you into the center and connects to a different universe and does not even pull you towards the sides but gives you a nice easy trip to another universe or galaxy. Would that not be really convenient?
[Or see the other papers from that conference

The Gra predicted the Holocaust. He said the book of Deuteronomy is divided into ten sections. Each section correspond to 100 years of the the 6th thousand year period. That starts at 1240. So 1939 is the very end of the section called "Ki Tavo" כי תבוא". The end of the section are the curses.
When he was explaining this to his disciple Rav Haim of Voloshin Rav Haim asked him where is the Gra himself hinted at in the Torah. He said אבן שלמה יהיה לך a perfect stone will be to you. [That is a stone use as a weight for measuring. "A perfect stone" is the letters Eliyahu ben Shelomo.  Taking this a bit further one can see that it is  a command of the Torah to walk in the path of the Gra since it says " a perfect Stone (the Gra) will be to you."

[This ends at 2240 AD. Then a new cycle will begin, I assume on Mars. But it could be that will be to the stars.]

mankind to the stars

SLS  and Starship are two kinds of starships that are now being used to bring men to the moon and Mars. But I have to say that I can see the importance of settling on Mars, but I would rather if mankind could go to the stars. In any way is that possible? Well, there is no way of knowing until the Physics is clear. Faster than light is out. So what is left is a Einstein-Rosen bridge [Worm Hole].
How could you get this? The only way is through string theory--branes.  String theory needs to be clearer in order to see if branes can do something like that. Branes are funny kinds of things because they are in fact like strings, but in other ways not like strings. That is they are not under space time. They are in space time just like strings. But things in space time can effect space time. For example Gravity. Another example is the Aahronov Bohm effect that effects easily the nature of empty space easily and simply.  [Just put a solenoid near the path of a charged particle. It effects the very nature of empty space.]
See this paper by Tentyukov printed in Russia which discusses a worm hole that is possible to transverse. That is when the metric is not flat.

B Minor w93

The debate between Kant and Hegel seems to have come down to a debate between McTaggart and Leonard Nelson with Dr Kelley Ross.
Most of philosophy of the 20th was trash as Robert Hana shows in excruciating painstaking rigorous detail.  In his book THE FATE OF ANALYSIS: Analytic Philosophy From Frege To The Ash-Heap of History,
So what is left after all others are gone? Hegel and and Nelson.

There are plenty of problems however with both. I can see why people like Ed Feser simply want to get back to philosophy of the Middle Ages--Aquinas's approach to Aristotle in particular.
But that does not seem like the best idea. See Thomas Reid's discussion of Berkeley. Though he disagrees it also seems clear he would not get back to Aristotle.

R.Yochanan said an idol that broke by itself is forbidden for use. Reish Lakish said it is allowed [to use. [e.g. to sell.]
The Gemara [avoda zara 41b] asks on R.L. from a mishna that a ground up idol is forbidden. Answer: a decree from the scribes since it might be found and used. Rather it must be thrown into the sea.
Ritva: the same question of the Gemara applies to R Yohanan. [meaning the case RY allows it i.e. when the idolater  himself nullifies it. Answer: יאוש שלא מדעת אינו יאוש giving up without knowledge is not giving up.
Rav Shach notes that this causes the original question of the Gemara to revert to RL without the benefit of the answer of the gemara.
He answers that both RL and RY agree that in fact an idol that broke by itself is no longer an idol from the Torah. All one can do is perhaps have a decree to forbid it.
My question here is that the original question of the Gemara assumes if a ground up idol is still forbidden then all the more so with the pieces still in tact. I simply am not sure how this was answered.

For some reason people do not take the problem with idolatry seriously. Clearly this was the reason the Gra signed the famous letter of excommunication and yet that fact is universally ignored.

The major reason the Gra signed the letter of excommunication clearly is because of the problem with idolatry. The problem with worshiping a corpse is certainly no worse than worshiping a statue.

And just because people put on black clothing is that supposed to imply that somehow or other that is equivalent to keeping the holy Torah? Or supposed to make them smarter or superior to others?
So we can surely see the Gra was right  and it is about time to start paying attention even though it is a bit late. Better late than never. The reason is the effects of ignoring idolatry is still with us.
And it is not just idolatry. Worship of the Sitra achra [Dark Side] is surely a more severe kind of idolatry.

"All men are created equal" is a fiction but very often believing a fiction is better than not doing so.
After all the fact that this is the core belief of the USA is better than the opposite that people are created unequal which opens to door to not nice things. You do want to treat people according to their actions.

And this is  a general principle. Sometimes believing in  a fiction can be helpful since it will help protect you from other fictions that might be much worse.

Rav Avraham Abulafia held that Jesus was not just a tzadik [saint], but more than a tzadik. But not to the degree of any kind of way that Christians believe. Rather the Seal of the sixth day.
Clearly his approach towards the Catholic church shows that in itself. [Not just his going to debate with the pope but also in places in his writings he is highly negative towards the church.] On the other hand. So as opposed towards his attitude towards the Catholic church, his attitude towards Jesus himself was very positive.
The basic idea is this: There are souls which come from the world of Emanation. Plenty. The Avot (Patriarchs) Moshe, Aaron, Joseph, David, Rav Haim Vital.  But most saints are from lower worlds. For example the children of Jacob the patriarch were all from the world of the Divine Throne [Creation.]
Regular souls of people are usually from any one of the lower worlds Creation, Formation, the Physical Universe.

One major difference between Emanation and the lower worlds is that Emanation is אלקות Divine.

Professor Moshe Idel has written plenty on Abulafia and other stream of ecstatic mystics from the Middle Ages so that would be the place to look for more information.`
[One way of understanding the insights of Rav Abulafia would be by non intuitive immediate knowledge of Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross. That is a kind of knowledge that does not depend on experience nor on reason.

w92 B Flat major

Whites did not make it because of advantages.

Africa had resource advantages, unlimited agriculture and minerals  While no other land was as desolate as Northern Europe--nothing but solid ground and trees along with lots of ice. That is all Europe had until Whites came.  So it is lack of advantages that led Europe to success. In fact I have asked myself why did Whites go to Europe in the first place? Were there not lots of resources in southern lands where the human race came from? Perhaps they were driven out? That is the only answer that makes sense to me. So whites made it in spite of adversity.
So what I predict is that now also they will succeed even they are being driven out and people seek to destroy them. They will succeed because of adversity.


Here is a nice example what Western Civilization has created:


Take your pick of pics of riots and attempts to destroy American cities to show the contrast,
For example: Take this picture for a prime example of "Black is Beautiful".

Which one do you prefer?

The sages said: one who does a kindness for whom that does not recognize it is as if they threw a stone at Markulis. If slaves have no gratitude for being freed, it would have been better not to free them.

Often you hear Christians say that slavery is inherently unjust.But such a stupid mistake can not have happened in the Middle Ages when people like Aquinas were rigorous and logical. But since the Christian world has forgotten about learning the Torah with painstaking exactitude they have fallen into a really ridiculous position and now are reaping the rewards.\
For Christians believe that a law of the Torah is wrong and unjust. In the Civil War, the North was highly committed to this even to the degree of murdering 1/2 a million Southerners based on the proposition that the North knew better. [As if murder is not also  a prohibition.]
Now this issue has nothing to do with the question if Christians are obligated to keep the Law of God. That has nothing to do with it. Rather the issue is they are saying that a law of the Torah is unjust and that they know better than God what is right and wrong.

Just for a reminder to myself and others that might have forgotten about the subject let me just mention here that there are two kinds of slaves. A Hebrew slave and a gentile slave. The verses in Exodus after the Ten Commandments refer to buying a Hebrew slave. The subject of a gentile slave comes up in other places. But in short the idea that a slave goes free after 6 years is referring to a Hebrew slave. A gentile slave never goes free unless his master frees him by receiving money [not anything the value of money, but actual silver coins. Not even dollar bills which are in the eyes of the Torah just documents שטרי הדיוט. A Hebrew slave can be freed if his master accepts either money or objects that have the value of money]--or he can write a document that frees the slave.
So I suggest to people that they should not submit. Do not let the slaves take over.
The sages said:
one who does a kindness for whom that does not recognize it is as if they threw a stone at Markulis.
If slaves have no gratitude for being freed, it would have been better not to free them. [Markulis is a predecessor to Mercury but his worship was different. The way of service was to throw stones at it.]

And if they come to attack you, I recommend to take the most drastic measures possible to protect your person, home and property. Stand your ground and never give in. Never accept their narrative as if you did something wrong. Giving in a little now will mean giving in a lot more later on.

[Also I want to recommend to people to stop looking at the news and getting upset. Rather get a shot gun and sit home and learn Torah. The reason a shot gun is important is that it is easier to hit a target with a shot gun than with any other kind of weapon.]

The South was right.

The South was right. על אלה רגזה הארץ על עבד כי ימלוך the verse [Proverbs] says that "Because of what shakes the ground? Because of a slave when he rules." So you see the problem with having a slave rule. This I saw in the last presidency, and for that reason stopped looking at the news. For when a slave rules everything is destroyed.


However I admit that keeping the Union together was important. But to wage war on the South because of an unjust reason makes no sense. It would have been better to negotiate their reentry into the Union. Or else perhaps just leave things alone. After all the USA and Canada are neighbors. Would it have made sense to go to war with Canada just because they did not want to be part of the Union?


Besides that you can wonder if any slaves are actually free? The Federal government was never endowed with power to  take private property at random. The Congress can tax but simply to declare a persons property to no longer belong to him is not among the powers given to the Federal Government. (Nor does an amendment to free them apply when the South was forced to agree. Being forced to agree is not the same thing as agreeing.) Slaves can be set free by a document signed by the owner or by money or by injury of limb. But other than that they remain slaves.
And I want to add that the whole idea of slavery being inherently wrong seems false since now blacks are enslaving whites. [So clearly they do not think slavery is wrong.]] Not just making whites work for blacks by means of the welfare state, but now literally trying to enslave the whites. So the whole idea of slavery being wrong is not an sincere argument. Of course I think this was their intention all along as they told me openly many years ago.
Of course if whites submit, then they deserve what they get. Rather it makes more sense to resist. Do not submit under any circumstances whatsoever.

[I would think that there ought to be laws that people can protect their property. What is after all the point of the second amendment of not for that very reason. Not to grant a right, but rather to recognize a natural right a person has to property their person and property?

An idol that broke apart by itself, and the signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication

In tractate Avoda Zara 41b there is an argument between R Yochanan and Reish Lakish about an idol that broke apart by itself. [I.e. by an earthquake or some other cause outside of just this: that its own worshipers or other idolaters broke it.]
Reish Lakish says its is OK. [That it its pieces are no longer considered to be part of an idol which is forbidden to receive benefit from].
On this the gemara asks from this Mishna: R. Yose said a Israeli who finds an idol grinds it into pieces or throws it into the sea. The sages disagreed and asked if just grinding is enough some can find the dust and use it. and we know that is not good from the verse לא ידבק בידך מאומה מן החרם ["..so that nothing from the herem will stick with you."] that says one can not derive any benefit from an idol.


For this reason it seems to me that the religious world that worships people ought to be avoided. It is not enough not to worship idols but also to derive no benefit from them. This would explain the signature of the Gra on the letter of excommunication [herem] since the laws of excommunication in fact entail this exact point.
The fact that this universally ignored does not make it invalid. Laws of the Torah are objective morality--that means not dependent on what people think or do.

The general approach of the Gra was no matter what the troubles are the answer is always just one thing: to learn Torah. This I would have to agree with even though I would expand the definition of learning Torah to include Physics and Metaphysics. That is well defined in the Guide for the Perplexed as referring to these subjects of the ancient Greeks. [Also on the first page of the Obligations of the Heart.] Metaphysics is not mysticism.

So the minimum would be to get through the two Talmuds, and the basic Physics up to String Theory. Metaphysics though I have a hard time to figure out what ought to be included. I am thinking besides Aristotle's books to include Kant and Leonard Nelson.

The religious world is a kind of Dark Side

The major problem I see in the religious world is a kind of Dark Side (Sitra Achra) aspect that seems to have settled on it and leaves its odor on everything. To some degree I thought I could avoid that by learning straight Torah in two great yeshivas the Mir in NY and Shar Yashuv.

But that turned out not to be as effective as I had thought. The reason is the verse in psalms סביב רשעים יתהלכון [round about go the wicked]. That is the Sitra Achra.

So as one tries to come to straight pure Torah as is learned in the Mir or Ponovitch, or any of the great Litvak yeshivas, there is this problem that holiness is surrounded by the Dark Side. And even if you manage to get inside the straight Torah world, the Sitra Achra (Dark Side) has anyway made its nest there.

What one might do is simply to get the essentials and go through them as best he can on his own. That would be the two Talmuds (with Tosphot and Maharsha on one, and the two side commentaries on the Yerushalmi]. [Or just even straight with no commentary at all in order to at least get through material at least once.] Then Rav Shach's Avi Ezri and Rav Haim of Brisk's Hidushei HaRambam. Those two books give one  a basic idea of how to get into the depths of the Talmud.

[I have mentioned before this that Rav Nahman of Breslov noted the problem with Torah scholars that are demons in the LeM I:12 and I:28. He hints to this also in LeM I:8. However the point here is bit different. He I am saying that as a result of Torah scholars that are demons the whole religious world is infected. So the cure is not simple. Normally one would go to  a straight Litvak Yeshiva based on the Gra in order to learn authentic Torah, not Torah of the Sitra Achra (Dark Side.) However it is nowadays hard to avoid the Sitra Achra even there.]

Dr. Kelley Ross was gracious to answer my question about the riots. He wrote: "It occurs to me that this is Antifa’s equivalent of the Tet Offensive.  They are hoping for war."


I think that means that Kelley Ross thinks the Left is hoping to dismantle the very Constitution of the USA and impose a socialist [Communist] dictatorship.

[The Tet Offensive was that that very idea. To attack cities in South Vietnam in order to cause the South to get rid of their government and accept Communism.

That sounds serious to me. I thought they were simply trying to burn down American cities. To dismantle the Constitution seems like it would be the worst disaster in human history. But anyway I have been thinking that a Mad Max scenario [where civilization collapses] is very much probable except for pockets of where Western Civilization will continue and prosper.

The odd position of time and space in the Bell's inequality does seem to have a lot to do with Kant. [That space and time are just ways of measuring things. But they exist like all dinge an sich (things in themselves)-they exist but reason has no access to understand them.].] [If the electron is here then it has no value for momentum. Not zero or anything else.Not just that there is conspiracy to keep us from knowing what it is.] That is,-- you first have to get out of the idea that there is action at a distance. All Bell's inequality means is that there are two possibilities, (1) things have no values in space and time until they interact. Or (2) action at a distance. But we know action at a distance is not true because of Relativity. So we are left with things having no classical values until measured.
SEE Gellmann There is nothing non-local about Einstein Podolsky Rosen


The idea that things have no value of space or time is not so strange. In Lemaitre's article in Nature 1931 where he discusses the big bang that he predicted he says that space and time had to have begun after the first quantum had already split into many others. So there is obvious some sub-layer underneath space and time. That is clear anyway from the Aronov-Bohm effect where you see that space has already a mathematical structure.


From other directions, Kant is being revived. Robert Hanna went through a painstaking rigorous detailed critique of 20th century analytic philosophy showing it is ready for the trash bin. [Even G.E. Moore.] But Neo Kantian-ism was discarded for other good reasons.
So by default one is left with Leonard Nelson's approach to Kant or Kelley Ross's synthesis of Nelson.

  Note that Nelson has been ignored almost universally.
On the other hand I can imagine that some might want to revive the other Neo Kant approaches of Marburg, Heidelberg or Husserl. Frankly, I would be happy with anything that would get back to Kant. [Robert Hanna seems to have a soft spot in his heart for Husserl. Still he says openly that he was refuted. There simply is no one left on the playing field except Kant and Leonard Nelson.]
Still that leaves the question about Hegel. To me it seems Hegel is fine if you understand him with McTaggart.
[I like McTaggart a lot, but I ought to mention that he provided a convenient target for those who wanted to attack Hegel and assumed McTaggart=Hegel. Also, they assume that the Metaphysical State was Hegel's, and you can see that Hobhouse thinks that way. Even though his critique on the Metaphysical State is not actually directly against Hegel. But seeing things in the former USSR without the force of the state I got a good taste  of a good argument for the state.  [Before the Soviet State, no one was going to have an American kind of Democracy in Russia and even today the whole idea seems absurd. You can not have an American kind of democracy without Americans! And that takes many years to develop that kind of mentality. Maybe it is DNA? or whatever. ]


[I wanted to mention that there is a lot of confusion about Bell. Bell's inequality does not
disprove causality. Rather it can prove one of two things. Either no causality or that things have no values in space and time until measured. Since we know there is causality because of GPS which depends on Relativity. So what we know now is things have no value in space and time until measured.  And that is not all that different from how Lemaitre explained the beginning of the universe where space and time did not exist until after there were already a bunch of quantum particles around. I saw this in the blog the reference frame [I think] later it became clear in my own study of QM, GPS is a nice proof of Relativity since it would not work unless both Special and General Relativity are true.
]

So there is something below time and space.

How do you have a beginning of the universe before there was even space or time. How can something start before something else when there is no "time"?

Yet that is exactly the idea of Lemaitre in an article about the expansion of the universe--the big bang. [The article was published in 1931 in Nature. That is: that  time and space existed only as statistical notions before there were lots of quantum particles.] [Lemaitre's original discovery of the expansion if the universe was from 1927.]


This fits well with the Aspect experiment which shows that nature violates Bell's inequality. That is-- there are no hidden variables. Particles have no values of space and time before they interact.
So there is something below time and space.

The religious world has a problem with worship of people.

Worship of people is an odd permutation of the old evil inclination of idolatry. But there is is some fine line. I can see the importance of straight pure learning Torah in Shar Yashuv and the Mir. But along with that there is  a surrounding penumbra of the religious world which does worship people.
So one does need a bit of discernment. That is why I emphasize the Gra and Rav Shach -because in the straight Litvak yeshiva world you get mainly straight Torah without the accompanying problem of idolatry that is the main problem of the religious world.


I mean to say that the definition of idolatry is not just to bow down to images or a statue. It is also not as wide as I have often heard. I spent a good deal of time with my learning partner David Bronson, on the Gemara in Sanhedrin pages 61-64 to get a clear idea of what it is.
My main conclusion is that religious devotion to anything other than God alone [the First Cause, with no form or image] is idolatry. So it does not have to be molten images.

An examples of idolatry that exists in the religious world is "graves of the righteous". But this is just one example.

There is an odd thing about "Torah shelo Lashma" [Torah not for its own sake]. It seems different than using Torah to make money.
The way using Torah to make money is often justified by a statement of the Rambam "not just the tribe of Levi, but all who put it in their heart to turn from the vanities of this world and learn Torah for its own sake, God will provide for their needs". This in no way contradicts the idea of the Rambam that one who uses Torah to make money has no portion in the next world. Rather he is simply saying that God will provide. This can not be used to justify using Torah to make a living.

This seems different than "Torah shelo Lishma" (not for its own sake) which is what the sages say to learn for honor. That is there is an intention to receive a side benefit that come automatically. People honor one who learns. But that is a lot different than intending not just a side benefit, but using it specifically to get that benefit [e.g. as a means of making money].   

Background In the Mishna in Sanhedrin there is a list of things for which one loses his portion in the next world. "Reading outside books" is one.

One aspect of "outside books" ספרים חיצונים that is hard to understand is that the way the Rif and Rosh understand it, it refers to books that create their own explanations of verses of Torah than are not from the Gemara or midrash. If we would accept this literally there is no book in the religious world that would be allowed to read. All of them come up with explanations of verses that are not from the Gemara or midrash.



Background In the Mishna in Sanhedrin there is a list of things for which one loses his portion in the next world. "Reading outside books" ספרים חיצונים is on the list. The Rif and Rosh explain that refers not to science, but rather books that explain the Torah-- but in ways other than what is in the Gemara. The issue is not that they are saying things against Torah. The whole point is that it is pseudo Torah. As long as it is not from the sages it is by definition Torah of the Dark Side.  This would mean almost all books in the religious world nowadays.

[The issue is maybe not as important as another more serious issue: worship of people. Why is it that in the religious world this is thought to be OK I am not sure.]

I discovered the best way to learn is the idea of "Girsa" [saying the words in order and going on] as I mentioned a few times before. But the thing that prevents people from learning fast is they do not know that the words get absorbed in some sub-level of the mind and there get processed. If people would be aware of this I think everyone would be able to learn the Oral and Written Law, Physics and Mathematics. Easily. Not that everyone would become geniuses, but the main obstacle would be removed--that people imagine to themselves that they do not understand when in fact once they have said the words in order, the deeper levels of the soul do absorb the knowledge and process it and eventually they will understand even plainly and simply.


[People also need the idea that learning Torah is a commandment. Not just that but also that "Bitul Torah" is a sin. But I have to admit that my idea of learning Torah includes Physics and Metaphysics as the Rishonim that follow Saadia Gaon hold. [However plenty of Rishonim do not hold that way. They do not hold of Aristotle at all.] But my idea of learning Torah is also restrictive in terms of the idea that you see in the Rif and Rosh about "outside books" which they define as anything that explains Torah in any way that is not open in the Gemara or Midrash. So that means books that explain Physics are not "outside books"since they are not talking about Torah. [So "outside books" does not mean what most people think it means. Just the opposite. Almost all books that people think are OK nowadays are actually the very things that the sages forbid.]



Another incentive to learn is an idea of Rav Haim of Voloshin a disciple of the Gra.
That is that when one gets up in the morning a decides to learn Torah the whole day, then there are removed from him all obstacles, all yoke of government or of making a living. And that day he will be successful in Torah. That makes more sense than most of what people spend time doing

w90 B minor. Violin, Recorder and other winds and brass  [w90 in midi]  w90 nwc

The USA did not start out alone. It was a continuation of the English model of government.
[Really the colonists just wanted to continue as English citizens, not serfs of Parliament. When the king refused to back them up, then they revolted.] But now the situation is different, some in the USA do not want a continuation of the English form of government [with a king, Parliament, house of commons Bill of Rights etc.] Rather Marxism along a Leninist model--that is the rule of a political party along lines of Marx.]

So here it does not look like there is much insight that can be gained from history. But I feel there is always some insight to be gained from history; but here it is not clear from what historical examples can provide insight.

But I feel there must be somehow, somewhere, an insight.

Even the Civil War does not seem to help much since both North and South wanted just a straight continuation of the principles of the Constitution.


Looting and chaos do not seem like very good answers.

[Allan Bloom in his Closing of the American Mind focused on education in universities. That might be a good place to start. Take his suggestion and close the humanities and social studies departments. Not that he was saying at first to do that. Rather his thought was they might rise to the challenge. But since they have not, maybe the best thing is to simply turn off their funding from state and federal government.

[I mean you can not simply close them. But you can vote to stop wasting money on "Gender studies" and all the other pseudo intellectualism.] [See the Bezmenov utube video about infiltration into the universities.]

Another suggestion on the positive side is to learn the Federalist Papers.

It is not that I am against communism automatically. Rather a lot depends on what comes before. If you have a situation of civil war in Russia, then bringing in the Red Army made sense.But to do the same in the USA would be a terrible idea. In my view the Constitution of the USA is the best of the best.